CEO @ Here | Healthy Longevity x Place | Place Planning | Speaker | Bestselling Author | Strategy Consultant
I'm a fan of The Economist and have been a subscriber for years. However, this week’s cover picture missed the mark. Biden’s limitations as a presidential candidate are linked to concerns about his mental sharpness, less his physical frailties. To conflate diminishing physical capabilities with diminishing intellectual capacities is inaccurate and misleading. Must we recall that FDR was a more than capable President during a time of international war and turmoil. FDR couldn’t walk unassisted. Such limitations didn’t seem to impair his judgment and effectiveness. When the media (especially largely respected and unbiased media outlets) carelessly promotes ageism, we all lose. We should debate the merits of presidential candidates based on their qualifications and capacities, not their age. Biden, like Trump, should be criticized and critiqued in the public square, but the case should not be framed on whether he uses a walker or not. The Economist, you can do better. Ashton Applewhite
This type of ‘image’ is blatant #Ageism ! It’s typical of what is happening in today’s media - that increasingly goes with a ‘shock’ type image and/or disparaging headline as ‘click bait’. There was a time when The Economist offered a considered, balanced and respectful image/headline that was explored within fair minded and intelligent discussion. Sadly, that’s no longer the norm today. The Economist was once a very respected publication globally but has recently lost a lot of its credibility. Any editor who thinks that taking a cheap shot against a respected servant to the USA, and uses ageist and disability imagery/content to support their case - is not a professional journalist, but simple a ‘hack’ moving their publication into ‘tabaloid’ territory.
We are seeing an unprecedented rise in ageism and ableism. Thank you for calling it out.
It is dismaying to see their point being made through this kind of careless imagery. The title given with this photo "Why Biden must withdraw" links their argument with the connotation in the mind of the reader of physical frailty and implied limitations in mental capability. Even without a title or article to read along with it, the image alone is provocative in the worst way. Wherever the reader falls on the political points being made, the underlying message of ageism and ableism was irresponsibly intertwined. People have always evaluated the "fitness" of a leader based on any number of traits, qualities and abilities. That won't ever change. From positively associated traits such as judgement, leadership, and civility to negatively associated, opposing traits (i.e. poor judgement, poor leadership), it's normal for us to challenge and ascertain qualities of leaders. What ISN'T or should not be normal is to associate factors of identity like age, ethnicity, gender, religion and other characteristics of "protected classes" as the basis of our challenge. This is a good example of what people mean that ageism is the only kind of discrimination that seems to still get a "pass" which is why discussions like this are vital.
Agree. We can discuss Biden’s age-related infirmities — and we should — without becoming cruelly ageist. This crosses a line.
Shameful cover by The Economist for all the reasons noted above.
I didn’t expect anything different from a pseudo-intellectual publication that promotes inequality, ageism and more ill-constructed ideologies. The magazine has been in the business of loathing and fear-mongering branding itself as the source for intellectual reading. It is precisely the very reason that populism is fomenting its hateful prongs all over Europe. It’s a British publication but look where it’s spreading division disparagingly. Outside of its own territory. Divide and concur is still the motto. Make other governments look deficient and unstable. Make the Great Britain look Great! I doubt that.
I couldn’t agree more, this left me with a terrible feeling in my gut, the overt ageism was central to their messaging.
It's a false assumption that *everyone* experiences cognitive decline as they age. FACT: Only 25% of folks aged 80-84 experience some form of cognitive decline. That means 75% do NOT! Ageism isn't an acceptable reason to discount anyone. And last I checked, it's against the law! https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/17990-mild-cognitive-impairment
it's to be expected in a culture that worships youth culture and media that monetize youth. Our disrespect for age is embedded everywhere, including where we live.
Advisory Member at Milken Institute Center for the Future of Aging
5d@Economist mind your responsibility as offering informed journalism; you have veered into ageist stereotyping.